[anthonycolucci]

At the first mention of anything political, we shall relocate your discussion from the Lobby to the Club House. You should hold accountable the person who chose to mention a politician or government policy in your thread, not us.

[jhein]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

Thanks for the continued interest...

The dyno video already has 1229 views!

[mgarblik]

It's rather amazing! I think it's safe to say Pontiac people just love classic cars and engines in general. I do.

[mgarblik]

I have a little update from Monday. As I more or less expected, the dyno session didn't go great. The guys worked on the FITECH FI system for 6 hours and made some progress, but the engine doesn't run nearly as well as it did with the generic BLP shop Holley carburetor it was broken in with. They were unable to make any power pulls as the FITECH system will not allow the engine to run lean enough no matter what they do with the various tables, programming, and 1 1/2 hours on the phone with the so called technical assistance. They were polite but but not very helpful. The system seems to be unable to run any leaner than about 10.5 :1 AFR. There is also a variation and rationality factor between the FITECH O2 sensors and our own wide band O2 sensors on the dyno. (which are known to be accurate.). So the guys are researching ways to make the engine run leaner and consulting with some friends of theirs that have decent functioning FITECH systems. I assume at some point, they will get it figured out and we can move on. I do find it a little distressing that with the giant bundle of wires, sensors, computers, and time invested, the engine ran much better with a simple Holley we had sitting on a shelf for a year with completely unknown jetting and calibrations. 4 nuts to mount it, hook up a fuel line, attach a throttle cable, touch the start button, and it ran better and had a more correct AF/ratio than all this complication. But many people feel fuel injection is necessary so more power to them. I am confident they will eventually get it worked out. It does start easily and idle decent.

Engine owner did provide cam card as asked in an earlier post. Here are some specs. Advertised duration: 280/280 Duration @ .050 242/242 Lobe lift: .384
Lobe centerlines: 114/114 Valve lift less lash .579 Lash: IN .022 EX. .026

Projected Boost: 15 PSI max.

Will update after today's class. Thanks for the interest.

[wbnapier]

Perhaps I am fortunate in that I have a well-tuned and functioning carb (tri-power). The complexity and expense of a FI system doesn't seem to always make sense to me for the benefits, but perhaps I am wrong.

[mgarblik]

I have owned 6 tri-power cars. Without exception, all had great throttle response, excellent full throttle acceleration and that wonderful sound. They all started right up within 3 seconds of cranking and fast idled great. The synchronization everyone is always talking about, I don't even understand what the heck they are talking about. Simple, reliable, what else can you ask for? Also good economy on the center primary carb. If there is just one thing that is concerning on tri-power, it is the multitude of flare fittings on the various fuel lines that could leak. They need to be checked periodically. Fuel injection is great until some chip made in Malaysia has a cold solder joint open up on a hot day and leaves you stranded. Better have AAA.

[Radman]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

I have owned 6 tri-power cars. Without exception, all had great throttle response, excellent full throttle acceleration and that wonderful sound. They all started right up within 3 seconds of cranking and fast idled great. The synchronization everyone is always talking about, I don't even understand what the heck they are talking about. Simple, reliable, what else can you ask for? Also good economy on the center primary carb. If there is just one thing that is concerning on tri-power, it is the multitude of flare fittings on the various fuel lines that could leak. They need to be checked periodically. Fuel injection is great until some chip made in Malaysia has a cold solder joint open up on a hot day and leaves you stranded. Better have AAA.

The need to synchronize the carburetors that everyone talks about is not needed on the Tri-Power set-up. The end carbs do not have a choke, or idle system. They are only working when you go past half throttle and the butterflies start to open up. Synchronizing is only needed if all three are active all of the time.

[mgarblik]

Short dyno update: The guys brought a friend with them who had about 2 years experience with FITECH and multiple installs under his belt. They decided to start from scratch as far as the software was concerned and begin as if it was a new install so the "expert" could observe all the parameters. It started instantly like it always had and within about 1/2 hour of running he found 2 serious problems that would effect how the engine runs and make it run rich. He found the NEW coolant temperature sensor was defective. It was giving resistance readings and dropping the voltage to the ECM that indicated the engine was on average 60-70 degrees colder than actual engine temp. This of course was driving the fuel mixture very rich. Also he found the NEW heated 02 sensor was not producing any usable voltage and skewed near zero. This would also drive the mixture extremely rich and explain why it didn't match the 02 sensors on the dyno as it should. So, the new FITECH essentially came out of the box with two defective sensors. New ones will be installed next Monday for session 3. My opinion: This is EXACTLY why I don't want this crap on my collector car. Unreliable, off shore components can really leave you on the side of the road or on the tow truck. Now that the super rich running problem makes sense, with proper working sensors, I feel confident they will have it running good next time. But if they were paying for dyno time, they would be out $750.00 on average so far dealing with defective junk and lost time on the dyno. Report back next week. Stay tuned.

[wbnapier]

Thanks for the update. For myself, I would have struggled to identify two faulty sensors. I'd likely have wasted days and countless dollars attempting to diagnosis the problem.

[mgarblik]

Originally Posted by wbnapier

Thanks for the update. For myself, I would have struggled to identify two faulty sensors. I'd likely have wasted days and countless dollars attempting to diagnosis the problem.

Understand completely. One of the things that makes this class so fun is the age range of the students. I have a 17 year old and a 82 year old and everything in between. The group of younger ones, say under 40, have little to no understanding of how in the heck a car engine can run WITHOUT a computer (s), and fuel injection. And the rest of the class wondering , "why you need 2 miles of wire, a dozen sensors, a hand held unit, a computer, a scan tool, and a PHD in computer science", to make a gasoline engine run when a battery, a set of points and a carburetor properly tuned will run just as good. I love the back and forth banter.

[Elarson]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

Understand completely. One of the things that makes this class so fun is the age range of the students. I have a 17 year old and a 82 year old and everything in between. The group of younger ones, say under 40, have little to no understanding of how in the heck a car engine can run WITHOUT a computer (s), and fuel injection. And the rest of the class wondering , "why you need 2 miles of wire, a dozen sensors, a hand held unit, a computer, a scan tool, and a PHD in computer science", to make a gasoline engine run when a battery, a set of points and a carburetor properly tuned will run just as good. I love the back and forth banter.

The banter will make all of your students smarter.....forcing them to see beyond their own limited world.

Eric

[Dick Boneske]

I have heard, for years, that a Cadillac intake will bolt on to the Studebaker heads. Is this true? If so, what is the history of why these engines are similar?

[mgarblik]

Originally Posted by Dick Boneske

I have heard, for years, that a Cadillac intake will bolt on to the Studebaker heads. Is this true? If so, what is the history of why these engines are similar?

I will ask and see if the Studebaker guys know anything about that. The 1949 Cadillac V-8 was 331 Cu. In. The largest Studebaker V-8 was just over 300 Cu In. So it's possible. I don't know of any connection between Cadillac and Studebaker engineering concerning the engines. Packard and Studebaker merged toward the end of their runs and Packard had a 320 Cu In. V-8 in 1955. But that engine was physically much larger than a Studebaker V-8. Those blocks could go nearly 500 Cu In. and the Studebaker was maxed out at 300. So I doubt they would interchange. I will see what the Studebaker guys say.

[694.1]

Both the Stude & the Caddy are known as "kettering" architecture. I don't know who copied who but I know the Stude was in development before the war. The Caddy will heads will support more airflow. The interesting thing is that the Small block Dodge was just about a copy of the Stude

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Dick Boneske

I have heard, for years, that a Cadillac intake will bolt on to the Studebaker heads. Is this true? If so, what is the history of why these engines are similar?

Apparently they will, with some modifications. https://forum.studebakerdriversclub....erchangability It doesn't appear there's any advantage in using a stock Cadillac intake, but there were performance intakes available for the Caddy that were used.

[mgarblik]

Originally Posted by 694.1

Both the Stude & the Caddy are known as "kettering" architecture. I don't know who copied who but I know the Stude was in development before the war. The Caddy will heads will support more airflow. The interesting thing is that the Small block Dodge was just about a copy of the Stude

It is interesting that you mention the small Mopar being similar because the Studebaker in this thread has a single plane aluminum Mopar intake with Studebaker flanges on it. With the school supplied carburetor, no real performance gain vs the stock dual plane Studebaker unit. If we can get the FITECH straightened out, I think we will see a slight improvement. Boosted, I think it will improve some more. The dyno will separate the "I think's from the truth!"

[mgarblik]

Monday update: The guys, (3) spent a solid 5 hours on the dyno working with the Fitech fuel injection system. They replaced the (NEW), defective sensors, installed a firmware update, per the Fitech technical assistance folks and began to run the engine. That took about 2 hours. The engine again started up instantly, and began to "learn", the necessary parameters as it warmed-up. After about 45 minutes of run time, they were ready to try a power pull. A/F ratio's under light load looked fat but tolerable at about 12.2 :1. As they tried to load the engine on the dyno, it went really rich and would not stabilize. They ran the engine at light load and moderate RPM's for quite a while to let the engine "learn "some more data points and lean itself out which it eventually did. Finally they were able to make a power pull. I was in the other lab down the hall, but I could tell from the sound the engine was fat. They were able to make a full pull and the engine was down almost 50 HP peak from the off the shelf carburetor we started with. I felt there was no way they were going to find 50 HP with that electronic monstrosity, but I was wrong! They kept at it. The biggest gain was replacing the spark plugs which were badly fouled from all the rich running during the "learning" process with the Fitech. By the time they were done for the night at 10:15 PM, with new spark plugs, the engine had equaled the peak HP we had base lined with the Holley shop carburetor. I was amazed after 15 hours on the dyno they had finally matched the performance of the off the shelf Holley with unknown calibrations. The Fitech had adjusted and "learned" enough to produce a full pull at 12.5-12.9 A/F ratio and a decent curve. Tonight, the plan is to run the engine supercharged and wrap this project up. I will try to grab a video of the engine running with boost if I can break away from the rest of the class. Thanks again for the interest.

[wbnapier]

Amazing....

[mgarblik]

The guys spent another 5 hours on the dyno last evening. I am happy to report they made some impressive power IMO, after overcoming typical problems with a non-cookie cutter engine package. Cutting to the chase: They made 27 pulls, working with timing and Fitech tuning and boost. Best pull of the evening was 484 HP @ 6000 RPM. Peak torque, 486 Ft. Lbs @ 5100 RPM. HP was still climbing pretty fast at 6000 RPM.s but the pressure tube connection separated right at the top of the pull. I feel confident it would have made 500 HP @ 6400 RPM or so. Engine likes 25 degrees of timing @ 11.5 Lbs. of boost on the best pull. They are going to make a few more pulls next Monday, then we just have to move on to other engines. We normally spend 2 class days per engine on the dyno, no more. We made an exception for this one spending 4 sessions on this one. We have the following engines on the schedule in the next 10 weeks, 1 real Boss 302 Ford, 1 Old school 426 Hemi, 1 stock restoration style 400 Pontiac 350 HP 68 GTO engine. Stock cam and all. A 440 Mopar, a SBC, a 4.8L and 6.0 L LS style engine, a 3.9L Dodge Dakota V-6, a model A Ford. Going to be busy. Thanks again for your interest. If it breaks 500 HP, I will post next week. I will also put up the video where it blows off the pressure tube. Tom V had asked for the data plate on the little supercharger so I posted a pic of it. I think it's the smallest one they make. Once again, sorry the pics are turned.

[jhein]

And here are the dyno videos. That's a great sounding motor and those are impressive numbers.

https://youtube.com/shorts/pShx4KGEE5k?feature=share

https://youtube.com/shorts/jq5uMEoSmqo?feature=share